User talk:Kirsdarke01

Welcome!

Hello, Kirsdarke01, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard
  if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

I also wanted to say thanks and a great job on the Victorian state election results. About time those were filled in! Well done! Frickeg (talk) 08:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I hope to eventually put in as many Australian state election results as I can. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 01:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And you've started on Queensland already! Keep it up! Frickeg (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work in WA! :) Your assistance has been appreciated. Orderinchaos 08:30, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on Queensland 2012. A few points: first, candidates for unregistered parties should be counted as independents. Gains or losses are based on the party that won the seat at the previous election (so Beaudesert should be an LNP hold). And don't forget to link notable third party candidates, like Ron Clarke. Great to see this getting done though! Frickeg (talk) 01:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for that. I'll keep that in mind for the rest of the districts. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 05:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Electoral results for the district of Chermside, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Under the

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. OrenBochman (talk) 07:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing great work with the Queensland results - kudos! Don't forget to link redlinked members, though; it saves a lot of re-linking when their articles are finally made. Also - where are you getting the swings from? I noticed Antony doesn't have them on his ABC database, which is where I assume you're getting the figures. Frickeg (talk) 09:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And okay, I'll do that for redlinked members. For the election swings, I'm using the calculations on Antony Green's 1986-1995 comparative analysis here: http://www.abc.net.au/elections/archive/qld/QLD1986_QLD_1995_ComparativeAnalysis.pdf . I'm using the redistributions he calculated for swings in the 1992 election, and 2pp results are provided there for the 1989 and 1986 elections. For the primary votes, I'm just using the 1986-89 results in the Queensland election database. I also have a copy of Colin Hughes' 1975-1984 results, so I'm using the results from the 1983 election provided in there for swings in 1986. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 10:58, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're awesome - you've got it all under control! I was remembering back when I first started doing election results, and I fell into the trap of not taking redistributions into account, which made for a lot of going back and fixing up. Keep it up! Frickeg (talk) 11:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for visiting! If you have questions, visit

SwisterTwister talk 06:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you mention that - I just posted over on the 2010 Senate results page suggesting something similar for the upper house, where we currently have no detailed results at all. I tend to agree broadly with this in principle, but I see a big problem in practice - these pages will be monstrous, far larger than the results pages for federal electorates at the moment. At the same time, I tend to agree with the need for comprehensive results for each election somewhere, rather than people having to trawl through 150 individual seats or something. I'd suggest raising it at

I noticed on your draft page for 1988 that Lowan has the Labor candidate finishing third in a three horse race, but winding up in the 2PP. Are you sure that's right? The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not right, but the source I'm using only had the final 2pp between Labor and National. It's like that on a few other seats too where Labor came third behind Liberal and National because they didn't count them properly as the National candidate had over 50% of the vote, and only used a Labor and Non-Labor count for 2pp. To clarify, I have them marked as two party preferred rather than two candidate preferred. Although at a later date, I might calculate the average preference flows from Labor to Liberal/National in that election and use that for 2CP instead. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 10:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to note that at some point in the article? That makes plenty of sense, but it does look very strange when reading it! The Drover's Wife (talk) 13:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose there's any chance you might be convinced to have a crack at doing some Tasmanian electoral results, is there? The Tasmanian Parliamentary Library used to have a fantastic page with all election results since about the 1910s, but they seem to have deleted all of the index files for it (though thankfully left the results pages themselves, strangely). It'd be fantastic to get these onto Wikipedia before they disappear altogether, and you seem to be a lot better at this sort of thing than I am. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think I could do that. Since it's proportional representation, Frickeg's Senate election boxes should work nicely. I have results from 1890 to 1984 saved from Colin Hughes' books, so if they're no longer on the parliament site, I'll still have them. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 12:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. You're a champion. All the actual results are still up on the site and can be accessed, strangely, from the links at this link but the indexes on the parliamentary site are all deleted. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, your results page for 1999 has a strange figure in Monaro - it says the Liberal candidate, Ian Marjason, polled 19.7%, receiving an 18.9% swing. I really really doubt there was a Liberal candidate who polled 0.8% in 1995 - what happened there? The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Electoral results for the district of Portland, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Liamdavies (talk) 05:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there meant to be two Independent EFF candidates there? The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:47, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For the truly exceptional work you've been doing on state election results; as someone who spent years on the federal ones I'm in awe of the speed and precision you've got going here, the breadth of your work, and the fact that you're including information that is not currently available online. Frickeg (talk) 00:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, a query - I wonder if Colin Hughes's book says anything about the Tasmanian LC elections? I'm not finding it easy to track down party affiliations for LC elections before the mid-2000s, when they were listed on the ballot. Frickeg (talk) 00:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking. It looks like it'll have to be the newspapers! Frickeg (talk) 10:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's your roadbloack with SA? The Drover's Wife (talk) 13:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit complicated, but doable. Go here - the second-to-last publication has their initials, and then you cross-reference them with the index at the end of the very last publication. Frickeg (talk) 06:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't changed the 2PP votes and % for Labor candidate John Hyslop when you copied the Mildura table, making it look like he somehow received substantially less votes in the 2PP than primary! The Drover's Wife (talk) 09:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think these awesome results pages of yours probably need categories of their own - they fit kind of weirdly in the general elections category. Something like "Results for x elections" or "Results for elections in x"? Wanted your input before going ahead. Frickeg (talk) 23:14, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who was Mundey standing for in Burwood? The Socialist Alternative linked there wasn't founded for more than 20 years afterwards. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating

Wikipedia editor Mr RD just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

nice work. Keep it up.

To reply, leave a comment on Mr RD's talk page.

Learn more about

Hi. Does your source have the results of the 1988 by-election for this seat? (Also, I've noticed as I was going around the Victorian results pages - awesome job, by the way - that the references only cite the VEC website, which only goes back to 2002. It would be a good idea to list your other source as well.) Frickeg (talk) 02:39, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I only asked because I noticed it was the same year as an election and they're so easy to miss. You really have done an amazing job with these pages! Frickeg (talk) 04:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Special Barnstar
		Hi! As someone who has contributed extensively to SA politics I wish to thank you for doing the same! SA politics is a very little edited area on wikipedia, and to see two editors, User:Kirsdarke01 and User:Diverman, contribute extensively at a time that seems there is a lull in activity on Australian politics articles generally on wikipedia is very refreshing and exciting! For this I award the special purpose barnstar! Thankyou!! Timeshift (talk) 00:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating

Wikipedia editor Narvekar ameya just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

The page is reviewed.

To reply, leave a comment on Narvekar ameya's talk page.

Learn more about

Hey - i'm trying to locate the PDF or other full data for the Newspoll but I can't seem to find it. Where did you get things like <.5% Nat? Timeshift (talk) 15:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the work, but can I pretty please request that you only add links after article creation so as to avoid redlinks? Thankyou! On another matter, you know what would make your fantastic contributions even more astounding? Collating the two-party margins to create pendulums and adding your collective seat result articles to individual seat result articles (ie: Electoral results for the district of Napier) as you progressively go back through the years. That would make you so totally awesome!! Timeshift (talk) 05:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happened? Adding historical results to seat pages, or seat result pages? If seat result pages, do you have an example diff? As for abolished districts, the editors removing those articles are incorrect and i'd back you up on that. As for orphan tags, it usually takes a few minutes, if you add the link straight after article creation it shouldn't be an issue. And pendulums are cool :) Timeshift (talk) 05:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, ignore them. The first one got shot down, the second one got unspeedied from a speedy user I don't even recognise. You did the right thing and most if not all ozpol editors would back you up. Especially as we have many many articles like Electoral results for the district of Napier now. And thanks, and thanks! Timeshift (talk) 07:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic work! Can I ask that you look out for red links that might be caused by differences in the spelling/fullness of names, ie: here? Timeshift (talk) 06:30, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can you please make corrections to your result table swings where the 2CP candidates were different from last time? See here as an example. Swing at the bottom (and only the bottom one, not the one next to the candidates) should be N/A if the 2CP candidates differed at the last election. See Swing (Australian politics). Timeshift (talk) 23:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you include the two-party vote in the seats where the two-candidate vote was not ALP v LIB? Ie: Mt Gambier? Timeshift (talk) 01:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find Heysen here however for Fisher, Frome and Mt Gambier, just insert 2PP with the percentage only from here until the individual vote numbers are released by the ECSA. Timeshift (talk) 02:07, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, great work on this once again. (I wish there was a way to watchlist an editor when you want to be notified of the content they put out, because I really love reading through these results pages and you do a great job with them, from someone who knows what a task they can be.) I wanted to ask - what do you think about the way the results table (the main one) currently has the Centre Party's swing as compared to the Country Party in 1966? I don't know that much about it but I always thought the Centre Party was a separate entity and not a re-branding of the Country Party. Likewise, the "Labor (Anti-Communist)" thing has to be a mistake, doesn't it? (I almost went and changed it but then I thought maybe the state branch kept the old name.) Frickeg (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating

Wikipedia editor Philg88 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this article.

To reply, leave a comment on Philg88's talk page.

Learn more about

The two-party preferred figures look wrong here - it has Labor with 32.4% of the primary vote and 18.0% of the 2PP! The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The percentages here add up to 114%, and the votes add up to more than the given total (which is what the 2PP votes add to). Not sure what's going on? Frickeg (talk) 04:32, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, re:

here, shouldn't Doutta Galla have had two elections, one re-electing Monica Gould and the other electing Tayfun Eren? Frickeg (talk) 06:37, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I suppose technically it was a by-election; it was just because I was making the

candidates page and I always put the so-called by-elections in there too, since they're happening as part of the state-wide election (a bit like how the Senate results used to be when they had elections for one or two seats in House-only years). Personally I'd include them in the general results page with a note (I don't know that they really deserve their own pages), but I'm not too bothered about it. Anyway, I for one really appreciate all the work you do in this area, especially with results like these that aren't available online (or, if they are, in limited form). Frickeg (talk) 08:12, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

That sounds like an excellent idea. It is quite common; often, of course, they want to transfer to the lower house, as is the case with White here. Frickeg (talk) 08:27, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very well done and a big thankyou on doing a pendulum for SA 1989. I really do look forward to you doing more pendulums and going back earlier for individual seat result table articles (really just a matter of copying the tables from your excellent 'Results of the'... articles). Seriously, i'm very pleased at the level of detail wikipedia is developing in the niche area of SA state politics. Kudos. Timeshift (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Kethrus. Kirsdarke01, thanks for creating

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. More reference required in 'Background' section.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on

Re this edit, how about "Liberal and Country" (i.e. no League)? I understand it might lead to confusion with the

What does it break? The LCL should only ever be referred to as the Liberal and Country League IMHO. Liberal and Country is far more ambiguous. Add the "league" and everyone knows which particular party is being referred to. I know it doesn't shorten it by much, but what about "Liberal & Country League"? Timeshift (talk) 03:19, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not to answer for Kirsdarke01 but when I was doing election results I made a conscious effort to keep party names to a single line. When they go to double it makes the tables look much messier (at least to my eyes) and also can give an impression of added importance for the candidate who now has twice the space of everyone else. Given that we routinely omit "party" I see no reason to keep "league". Given that these are SA election results I see no ambiguity to "Liberal and Country" (any more than "Liberal" is ambiguous, considering the number of times that name has been used historically). To be honest I wouldn't even be opposed to "LCL" necessarily. Frickeg (talk) 03:25, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Either one is fine with me. I just mainly wanted to test it because the full "Liberal and Country League" made the table on the top right push out a bit far. I have a preference for just "Liberal Country League" since the 'and' seems to be the least necessary word, and it links to the full L&CL article in every instance. I can see the value of "Liberal and Country" though, it can easily be identified from the Victorian case by the colour. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 03:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see the problem. Yeah, it would be good to find a way to keep it to one line in each election box. On that note, I think Liberal and Country would be the better option.Kirsdarke01 (talk) 03:30, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree "Liberal and Country" is an obvious shortening, whereas "Liberal Country League" sounds like it's the actual name of the party (similar to today's LNP). The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:07, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antony Green here gives Alicia Bignold as the first candidate of the Marie Bignold team. This has always baffled me; why wouldn't she run for re-election? Does your source say that it was Marie Bignold who was the candidate? (If it does, that is a very odd error; I have no idea where the Alicia came from, since it's nowhere in Bignold's name. EDIT: Alicia is apparently Bignold's daughter. Still odd that Marie Bignold wouldn't run.) Frickeg (talk) 01:28, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Bignold ran for the lower house seat of Gordon? The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not in 1991, although she did run in the 1992 by-election. Frickeg (talk) 07:08, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, can I ask what references you're using for the Victorian state results? In going through all the post-election updates, I'm realising how dire our seat histories are (a lot of them are nearly a decade old, and weren't well written then!), and it'd make my life a bunch easier if I can rewrite them from your result lists and cite it to something. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:21, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Would it be possible to come up with references for the specific books? I don't actually need to get hold of the books, I just want to make sure the results are properly cited when I rewrite these electorate articles since they're an uncited mess as it is. (Also, it's probably something that should be referenced on the results pages anyway for when people decide to be difficult about it.) Thanks for the tip about The Age as well, will keep that in mind. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:34, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh fail. Clearly I need to have my morning coffee already. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:49, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for producing this chart. I've moved it into the election article at

Thanks for doing the results tables for the Victorian election—I've had some major issues out of my control which meant I haven't been able to run them out. I was going to try and do it tonight, I'll still do it and can check the ones you've done against them, or fill in any you haven't got to yet. --Canley (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Australian Barnstar of National Merit
	What a quiet achiever you are! Well done and Merry Christmas! Kerry (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much. Happy christmas to you too. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 09:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Prompted by your great work on the 1994 election, I went on a detective hunt and managed to complete candidate tables for the remaining missing NT elections (1987 and 1990) without having to go to a big library! The only snag is the CLP's candidate for MacDonnell in 1987, for whom I have only a surname, Davis. I'm hoping you might be able to help? Frickeg (talk) 09:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are fantastic as always - although if the Jaensch book is the one called "Challenge from the Nationals", I found no joy there. Frickeg (talk) 11:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thankyou so much for all your hard work and efforts with SA state politics articles. You've done a great job with articles like

Thanks! Timeshift (talk) 06:14, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance of some Legislative Council results for SA? I've just noticed that it seems to be the one state that currently has nothing in terms of upper house results. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are an absolute champion. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for some reason there aren't any results pages for the SA House of Assembly in 2006, 2010 and 2014. I was going to do these myself as copy-paste jobs but then realised I can't do the overall table. If there's any chance you could add that to your list of things to do one day I'd be grateful. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the contribution. I don't suppose you'd be interested in going a step further and adding candidate elections and eliminations from here? Timeshift (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Timeshift (talk) 01:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would be great to hear your thoughts on an idea for the results pages I was discussing with The Drover's Wife a week or so ago. The discussion is here and here. Frickeg (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any ideas about the new names for those pages? The state results pages are mostly your babies, and none of the suggestions we came up with translate across to state elections all that well. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How would that work for state elections though? The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:52, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's where this idea started out, and I'm fine with that too. I am just not sure it makes sense to change the federal structure away from "Results of the Australian federal election, x" but not the state structure. I think changing one but not the other could get a bit confusing, and Frickeg made the point that turning them into articles with prose coverage of individual races is getting a bit far from the original topic of them being just the results. But I don't have strong opinions either way here - just sounding out ideas. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:59, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Loving your pendulums for historical SA elections! How long does it take you to whip one up? Obviously i'd love to see 1970, and a whole lot further, but just wondering how long it takes you to do one? Timeshift (talk) 16:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could I be so bold as to plead with you do to SA 1968 ASAP? :) Timeshift (talk) 06:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Timeshift (talk) 06:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you plan on doing the 1950s SA pendulums soon? Timeshift (talk) 03:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

]

Vote 1 for Kirsdarke01!

	For getting results out of the ballot box!
	Keep up your excellent work on those election result articles! Kerry (talk) 09:00, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Not long before I manage to get the results of every state election since 1901 up (less than 100 to go). Kirsdarke01 (talk) 09:05, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for plugging away at those election results! Kerry (talk) 07:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Australian politics/party colours/Independent Greens

Template:Australian politics/party colours/Independent Greens has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 01:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kirsdarke01. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the 1923 results, you've got two people elected fifth in the Sydney seat? The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. It's fixed now. Thanks for pointing it out. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 09:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work on WA election results and Australian election results in general. I've noticed you've got the 1911 WA election (and presumably the 1908 and 1897 elections) on your to-do list. I have access to the results book for those, so if you want to concentrate on other states I'd be happy to volunteer to knock them off. Ditto for the WA Legislative Council elections – from my work on bios I get the impression that a lot of MLCs were elected unopposed, so that should be much less laborious than the lower house. One other thing – would you mind if I chopped the "(Legislative Assembly)" off of article titles like

On the results and candidates pages for this election, you have the Grey Power and Green tickets for East Metro as identical. Frickeg (talk) 03:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found some details but a first name for the lead candidate would be great! Frickeg (talk) 03:37, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh drat, sorry about that. And the reference I was using was a Library book at the time too so I don't have that information on me at the moment. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 03:48, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, and no rush! Next time you happen to be there or something (I'll keep an eye out too). Frickeg (talk) 03:58, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kirsdarke01, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on

Thanks so much for looking that up! I hadn't heard of these two, but having looked them up they both exist (I suspect Owen Clark is Owen Herbert's son). Owen Herbert was apparently Australia's first Mormon mayor (he was mayor of Charters Towers). Owen Clark looks to be a psychologist. Frickeg (talk) 02:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for updating population figures today. Please note that {{Census 2016 AUS}} is now available and will make any further updates much easier. --AussieLegend (✉) 10:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great work you did on creating articles for the new Queensland electorates. However, I am puzzled by the margin percentages that you added based on Antony Green's analysis. I double-checked a couple and the percentage in the article didn't match the percentage in the Green's pendulum. E.g. Electoral district of Macalister says 6.2% in favour of Labor but Green's pendulum has it as 6.4%. Similarly for Theodore, the article says 5.2% and Green says 5.3%. Do you think that Green has updated his numbers after you saw them or are you doing some offset from Green's percentages for a reason (e.g. you are reporting something subltly different to Green)? Thanks Kerry (talk) 01:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's a pity that the ABC didn't mark the page as being updated. Indeed, it seems there is no source date on it of any kind! Kerry (talk) 01:49, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kirsdarke01. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kirsdarke01. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I kindly invite you to the discussion on Template talk:Infobox election#The Bolding issue to decide whether to bold the winner in the election infobox. Lmmnhn (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All NSW election results pages should now be a single list for each election. --Find bruce (talk) 10:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Results of the 1911 Victorian state election (Legislative Assembly), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Electoral district of Glenelg.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I strongly suggest that you replace any usage of the first with the second, I do hope you are able to see the advantage... JarrahTree 12:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm mainly doing this just to fill in gaps for candidate pages, you're free to correct my poorly coded references as you wish, I've been out of this for a while. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 12:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

good on you if you are returning and fixing things up, and thanks. no big deal. JarrahTree 13:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]